Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/Pixar

Main

Current

Reviewed

Archive

Guidelines

FAQ

Committee

RotM

Pixar

Boy, does this need a ton of criticism. Sir MacMania GUN—[15:41 10 Aug 2009]

Humour:	6	I'm pretty sure I see where you're going here, and I like it--it's pretty funny. The only problem is that I had to work hard to get it. Granted, this may be "hard" only in comparison to my usual lackluster reading performance, but let's face it: readers are damn lazy. So don't be shy. Go all out.
Concept:	9	You've got a good concept--yeah, Pixar movies are painstakingly repetitive (something one might not notice right away) so let's show it through a stylized article. Great. Make it a bit clearer, though, that that's what you're doing. Not too obvious, of course, but maybe try not to be so generic ("Character" and "Companion" are nice, but you could also try "Hero" and "Sidekick" [unless that's too campy] or "Alpha protagonist" and "Beta protagonist" unless that's too science-ey).
Prose and formatting:	6	I like the screenplay format, but it's not polished enough. Maybe try playing around with fonts and formatting--y'know, make it look like a screenplay. You could do some fun things--have you read UnScripts:Trapped_at_Sea or Film Noir? Also: perhaps reconsider the caps.
Images:	9	At first, images without captions were a little disorienting. By which I mean I took one look and hid under my keyboard. But after reading the whole article, I think it could work. It's especially good during the "Filmography" section. Your image choice is brilliant, too.
Miscellaneous:	7	Work on the linkage. I'm not too crazy about the in-jokes, or the lack thereof. Half that page should be blue and underlined, mister. Also, thanks for cutting out Cars--you get points for that.
Final Score:	37	All in all, a good start. What does that tell you? Rather little, I suppose. Hope I could help. You've got a great sense of humor.
Reviewer:	--Vana 01:05, 12 August 2009 (UTC)